Writing high quality grant applications is easier when you know how research funding agencies work and how your proposal is treated in the decision-making process. The Research Funding Toolkit provides this knowledge and teaches you the necessary skills to write high quality grant applications. A complex set of factors determine whether research projects win grants. This handbook helps you understand these factors and then face and overcome your personal barriers to research grant success. The guidance also extends to real-world challenges of grant-writing, such as obtaining the right feedback, dealing effectively with your employer and partner institutions, and making multiple applications efficiently. There are many sources that will tell you what a fundable research grant application looks like. Very few help you learn the skills you need to write one. The Toolkit fills this gap with detailed advice on creating and testing applications that are readable, understandable and convincing.

The Department of Health and Human Services has identified Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) as the foremost public health problem in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) report that, as of December 31, 1994, there were 441,528 documented cases of AIDS in this country, and the number is increasing. AIDS is an illness characterized by a defect in natural immunity against disease. Many more individuals are known to be infected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) but do not have symptoms or the defming characteristics of AIDS. The incubation period for AIDS may range from 1 to 10 or more years in adults and 6 months to several years in children. Infected persons appear to be capable of transmitting infection indefinitely, even if they remain asymptomatic. In order to increase the number of minority investigators conducting research on HIV infection and 1 AIDS, NIMH conducted a 3h-day technical workshop for minority investigators on July 24-27. 1990, in Fairlakes, Virginia. University-based research programs were asked to nominate investigators who were selected on the basis of a referred 1 0-page prospectus for a proposed research project. This procedure was used because NIMH wanted to be sure that the prospective investigators were established in a research environment that would pr

Success at seeking and gaining funding is now a vital component of building of a successful research career. The book sets out the case for why success at winning funding is so important, from both an institutional and individual researcher perspective.

Gain a head start in your academic career with this step-by-step guide to building an externally funded research program.

This accessible, hands-on text, for new grant writers and seasoned health researchers, educators, and clinicians alike, illuminates the process of writing a persuasive request for funding from start to finish. Packed with practical tips for dealing with common pitfalls besieging grant seekers, the text progresses step by step from establishing the need for the grant through disseminating grant findings. This third edition is distinguished by key information about newer grant mechanisms and a fresh focus for foundation and corporate grants. It also includes updates on electronic submissions and web resources. Useful supporting features include examples and underlying principles for each guideline, examples of grants and specific elements that lend themselves to the development of PowerPoint slides for traditional or online classroom use, real-life examples from actual grant applications, and links to online resources to support searches for grant funders and websites supporting grant applications. Armed with savvy tips and advice from the authors—an experienced grant writer, grant reviewer, and grant consultant—readers will be able to write a persuasive grant with ease. NEW TO THE THIRD EDITION: Top-notch grant writing guidance for all health professionals Information about newer grant mechanisms emphasizing community-based and patient-centered outcomes research grants Foundation and corporate grants focusing on population health, personalized health, and interprofessional team grants that include community collaborations and corporate partnerships Important information on the Patient-Centered Research Institute Guidance on how to involve stakeholders and communities in study design and implementation Updates on electronic submissions and web resources New coauthor who is a successful PCORI awardee Instructor’s PowerPoint slides KEY FEATURES: Describes the process of writing a persuasive request for funding from start to finish Delivers practical tips from experienced authors for dealing with common pitfalls and difficulties Includes examples and underlying principles for each guideline Provides real-life examples from actual grant applications Helps readers to apply principles for selling and justifying the grant to their own proposals

Since 1992 the Department of Defense (DOD), through the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command, has received congressionally earmarked appropriations for programs of biomedical research on prostate, breast, and ovarian cancer; neurofibromatosis; tuberous sclerosis; and other health problems. Appropriations for these Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs are used to support peer reviewed extramural research project, training, and infrastructure grants. Congress has become concerned about funding increases for these programs given current demands on the military budget. At the request of Congress, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) examined possibilities of augmenting program funding from alternative sources. The resulting IOM book, Strategies to Leverage Research Funding: Guiding DOD's Peer Reviewed Medical Research Programs, focuses on nonfederal and private sector contributions that could extend the appropriated funds without biasing the peer review project selection process.

The past half-century has witnessed a dramatic increase in the scale and complexity of scientific research. The growing scale of science has been accompanied by a shift toward collaborative research, referred to as "team science." Scientific research is increasingly conducted by small teams and larger groups rather than individual investigators, but the challenges of collaboration can slow these teams' progress in achieving their scientific goals. How does a team-based approach work, and how can universities and research institutions support teams? Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science synthesizes and integrates the available research to provide guidance on assembling the science team; leadership, education and professional development for science teams and groups. It also examines institutional and organizational structures and policies to support science teams and identifies areas where further research is needed to help science teams and groups achieve their scientific and translational goals. This report offers major public policy recommendations for science research agencies and policymakers, as well as recommendations for individual scientists, disciplinary associations, and research universities. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science will be of interest to university research administrators, team science leaders, science faculty, and graduate and postdoctoral students.